tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN October 29, 2019 5:59pm-7:05pm EDT
solutions, i feel his recent behavior raises serious questions. american tax pay verse a right to know what secretary perry was doing on his frequent travel to ukraine as a public servant, beholden to the public trust. americans have a right to know what he observed, who he was meeting with, and who was benefiting from the contacts and deals he was making. the constitution entrusts the house of representatives with holding the executive branch accountable. that's what we must do. as u.s. foreign policy in ukraine has been sidelined in favor of president trump's personal and political agenda and abuse of power, secretary perry should do what is right and comply with the house's investigation. america deserves nothing less. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to
address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor edward poe bust gimbings, an american war hero and korean war combat veteran who passed away in august of this year at 7 years of age. he joined the marine corps at the age of 16 during the korean war. mr. burr chet: the fought the -- mr. burchett: he participated in the black cade of won ton, the longest naval blockade in modern history and the frozen chosen, so called because of harsh winter conditions. countryroud to serb his and proud to be a marine. he retired after a 40-year career, he was a member of the camel county honor guard, appalachian chapter 105 and
commander at the campbell county young marines. there are real heros in this world and they aren't music stars, famous athletes or hollywood actors. our country's heros are the men and women of our armed forces. he served and sacrificed for our freedom. it is my honor to recognize edward poe b; stick and the -- as the 2019 veteran of the month. i yield back the remabeder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania ek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. >> last week we celebrated the life and service of our colleague elijah cummings. he said our children are the living mealseningers. nothing could be truer. students and young advocates inspire me every single day.
an initiative in my district launched this month. inspired by rogram sandy hook to reduce bullying violence. the students have been encouraged to say hello to students they say every day or hold the door for someone they don't know. in honor of kindness month i have reached across the aisle to say hello and strike up with colleagues i may not know that well. we have something to learn from the students as we work together to create a world that is respectful, fair and kind to this generation and the next. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. on november 7, utah will honor a
soldier's soldier. the men and women of the utah national guard have been instired by major general burton. mr. bishop: this will fourth generation led the engineer battalion in iraq. eneral burton was tasked to be the zoo back into their closure after the iraqiy let them on the street. helping them recognize their own potential. he is highly educated, kind and deeply spiritual and he values his wife whose support has allowed him to serve. germ burton, i'm asking you a lot but we will accomplish the mission. after 37 years, we say mission accomplished.
i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor congressman elijah cummings after his sudden passing on october 17. much has been said about his legacy and dedication to the people of maryland's 7th district, but i rise to honor his humility and incredible love for our country. not knowing that he was near the end of his life, i was honored to have several personal conversations with congressman cummings. he was struggling with health issues and knew i could relate. but he was concerned with more
than just his health at that moment. his concern about our country. america has come a long way during his lifetime, but he knew it would not take much to undo the progress that we have made and he was worried about it. it was an honor to have such a conversation with an american i concxds con, several rights legend and my father on the floor of congress. it is a moment i will treasure forever. and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today in honor of the head start awareness month.
since 1965, head start has been one of our best tools on the war of poverty helping children reaching full potential from early education. as we pay tribute to this program, i rise to honor head start programs in california's 21st california district and the work they do to support central valley communities. this summer, i brought congresswoman barbara lee, a top tier head start center. it was truly an honor to see central valley educators and joining them in the classroom and read a couple of books. we all know that part-time early childhood education has an impact to develop reading, writing and math and social skills. i'm proud to support legislation
so we can keep quality education to all of our kids regardless of zip code. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: do any other members seek recognition for one minute? does what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. lee jee ms. jackson lee: the state of texas has a large number of active duty. lieutenant colonel. unfortunately, there were those who wanted to analyze lieutenant vintman's legacy. but i think it is important to say what he is, a patriot.
i read his testimony. it was straightforward, detailed , it certainly was without ex acknowledge ration and you could clearly see that this man cared about his nation. we should respect the men and women of the united states military, particularly a purple heart recipient, a wounded warrior, who fought for his country and was wounded. so i thank him for coming forward as a patriot, as a man in the united states military, as one who has no issue with any person. he simply wants to tell the truth. since we need just a little bit of expression here today, i conclude my remarks by saying, go astros, i wish them well. that's what america is about. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman he yields.
because i love my country and i rise tonight also because we had a hearing today in financial services. and we had the hearing today because of words that dr. king called to our attention. he reminded us that in a real sense, all of life is related. he said that life is an ines capable network of mute talt, ied to a single garment of destiny. what impacts one directly impacts all indirectly. he said i can never be all that i ought to be all you are all that you ought to be. and you can never be all that you ought to be until i am all
that i ought to be. this hearing was held because we and d to highlight recognize the fact that discrimination exists for persons who are members of the lgbtq community. tonight, i want to talk about this discrimination not only as it relates to the lgbtq community but other communities within our country. and in fact, all of these communities are a part of humanity. with reference to the lgbtq community, we had empirical beyond a hat proved reasonable doubt, that members of this community are being discriminated against when they apply for loans and being charged higher interest rates in
a greater percentage than persons who are not members of the lgbtq-plus community. they are being discriminated on their jobs. they are being discriminated when they apply for jobs when it is known or suspected that they are members of the lgbtq-plus community. discriminated in pay raises. the lgbtq-plus community is being discriminated against. and it does not make good sense to do this, but it also does not make good dollars and sense to do this because we are talking about millions of people, the estimates are as high as 16 million, some say more, some say less. we are talking about a $1 trillion economy within the
community. it just makes good sense for us not to discriminate against people who want to put their money into the economy and want to put their work products into the economy, who want to help america succeed. it does not make good sense for this level of discrimination to exist, but it does. and one of the salient messages that we wanted to impart at this hearing today was the message that you are not alone. there are persons who are allies of the lgbtq community who are going to stand with you, who are going to stand for you, and who are going to stand against the discrimination being perpetrated upon you. .ife is an incapableable work the muslim community is being,
has been and most likely will continue to be discriminated against until there is some change in this country. we have had from the highest office in the land an indication that muslims should be banned from the country. and an attempt was made to perfect such a ban of muslim persons from the country. network, ines cable if you can ban one religion, you can ban another. knows today only fate which will be tomorrow. we must protect every religion if we want our religion to be protected. this is the way life works. ity, what impacts one
impacts all. people of color are being discriminated against. the latin x exmp community. the family separation that took place at the border was unconscionable. it is hard to believe that this country that holds out the welcome torch, the statue of liberty, this country who has brought in immigrants from across the globe would turn away children who are fleeing harm's way, and the way that we did it, who, with this country, that has a history rooted in the immigration would do such a thing. babies crying for their mothers as they are being torn out of their arms. . . it's a sad thing when uconn template it. it's a very -- you contemplate
it. it's a very sad thing when you see it perfected. we cannot allow this to happen to children who are coming here trying to flee harm's way. because the truth be known, but for the grace of god there go i and possibly you. we all can have dates with destiny that we cannot contemplate in the present. so we ought to protect the rights of people who are fleeing harm's way. who are only asking for what the law provides in this country. and the law in this country does provide for people who are fleeing harm's way to come and say, i am here, i am here because i need help. will you help me? will you give me the opportunity to demonstrate that i qualify
for the opportunity to become a part of this country? rather than sum arly turn people away, or send out a clarion message that we have no more room. don't come. go back. this is not the country that does this. to borrow a frizz from a greater, -- a phrase from a greater, noble american, who has made his transition, the honorable elijah cummings, we are better than this. this country understands that we must continue to be the light for the world when it comes to righteousness. when it comes to african-americans, we have a history, a long history of invidious discrimination. a very long history. a civil war was fought because
of the invidious discrimination being perpetrated, the hate, if you will, that was being perpetrated upon african-americans. d today, within the last several months, perhaps a year or so, we've had the chief executive officer to proclaim that we have some s-hole countries. countries that are predominated by persons from africa. where africans are the indigenous population. but persons in this country, persons of color of african ancestry are being discriminated against as i speak. as is the case with the others that i've mentioned earlier, i might add also. being discriminated against. and there are people who say,
when we talk to people about the issues that are of concern to them, we have to talk about kitchen table issues. well, i can tell you without question, reservation, hesitation or equivalentcation when african-americans talk about kitchen table issues, they talk about invidious discrimination. they may not use this terminology, but the import of what they say is the same. they say, i'm being discriminated on the job, discriminated against. they say that, i've suffered discrimination when i tried to apply for a loan. they say, i suffered discrimination when i've sought to get a promotion. they talk about discrimination. it is a kitchen table issue. ut there are those who don't see it as such. or if they do, they don't talk
about it as such. it is a kitchen table issue. invidious discrimination in the african-american community. there's invidious discrimination in the asian community. we have been working to try as best as we can to deal with the question of linguistics. we have seen this happen in the latin-x community, the latino community as well. people will advertise in one language and when you come into the place of business, they will conduct business in another language. so you induce to come in and transact business, let's just use this as an example. in spanish. induced to come in and transact business in spanish. but once you arrive, the
contract is in english. there are many who would say, well, what's wrong with that? well, here's what's wrong with that. if you know that you are going to communicate in english when you bind the person with the contract, why would you entice the person to come in in spanish? if you know that you have no intentions of conducting your business in spanish, why would you entice the person to come in with spanish? this is a form of perfity. it's ill will. it is not the way people of goodwill treat other members of society. we respect people to the extent
that we want them to understand what they're doing. in the area of housing, we have tried on a contract to have language that simply said, what language would you prefer to do business in? and we indicate that you do not have to complete this portion of this document, if you choose not to. this is a person who is applying. and we also indicate that this is not going to be binding upon the person who has presented the contract. we're trying to get some sense of the linguistic needs that are prevalent in our society. just trying to get some sense. however, that language that we have worked and toiled to put in place has been rejected. it has been rejected and we are
trying to protect it. i have traveled to many places in my lifetime. i've had the good fortune to travel to many of the continents and many countries. d in so doing, i have always appreciated the fact that people would try to communicate with me in english. in each and every country, there were people who would assist me in english. there may have been some exceptions. but generally speaking, english. people moving through airports distant places can have the announcements made in english. i have gone to hotels where the persons who were working in the hotels and foreign -- in foreign countries could speak multiple languages. one of them would be english. people have catered to us across
the globe. we have had the welcome mat extended to us because we are americans and we speak english and they want to do business with us. they want to roll out the welcome mat. unfortunately we have not shown a similar characteristic. it is my belief that we ought to show a level of respect to other people who come to this country. many of them are here to do business, many of them are here as immigrants. many of them are here for lawful purposes. yet we do not concern ourselves with the linguistics. we have had difficulty putting up street signs in communities that are in multiple languages. there are many people who oppose this. when i've traveled through airports and through other countries, i've seen the signs
in multiple languages, including english. life is an innes capable network of inescapable network mutuality. this discrimination must end. because it not only impact the persons who are being scrim -- impacts the persons who are being scrimmed against, the lgbtq, the muslims, the people of color, the african-americans, the latin-x, the asians, it not only impacts these people directly, it impacts all of us indirectly. because dr. king was right then and his words of profundity still ring with truth today. i can never be all that i ought to be until you are all that you ought to be. and you can never be all that
you ought to be until i am all that i ought to be. all of this has been called to your attention, my dear friends, because i believe that there is still work to do with reference to the question of impeachment. i have said on this floor before , when i spoke here last, and i say again, we cannot allow invidious discrimination to be weaponized so that people suffer to the extent that the weaponization is creating the suffering. and it starts at the top. and because it starts at the top, this house has a duty to start at the top. nd if we do our duty and start at the top, we will understand that just as we can impeach a
president for issues related to national security, we can impeach a president for issues related to invidious discrimination. he republicans did it in 1868. republicans, some things bear repeating, republicans impeached a president in 1868 based upon issues rooted in invidious discrimination. we just fought a civil war and those who were called freedmen, freed persons, if you will, were working with a friedman's bureau to try to acquire the same -- freedmen's bureau to try to acquire the same rights as others. there was a president, andrew johnson, who was of the opinion that they did not merit the same rights and he fought against the freedmen's bureau. he fought to maintain white supremacy.
but radical republicans, radical republicans, radical republicans, radical republicans stood up to him. they impeached him. and president johnson changed his tune, to borrow a phrase. oh, he was still the bigoted racist of his time, but he did tone down and he did not get re-elected, by the way. he was a successor to abraham lincoln. . t he did not get elected i should not say re-elected, he was vice president, and he did not get elected president. the point is this. if radical republicans cared enough for newly freed people, radical republicans, they cared about invidious discrimination,
had just fought a war. they stood up -- by the way, i have an opinion that i'll share with you. i believe that the republicans in this house right now would do a similar thing if a democrat happened to occupy the white house and behaved the way the current occupant behaves. i believe that republicans of this time would respond the same way the republicans of that time, in 1868, responded. person in hat if any the white house who was there with the title of democrat behaved the way the current occupant behaves, that person would be impeached and
republicans would lead the charge. life is an inescapable network of mutuality. -- impacts one directs all impacts all indirectly. our failure to act today is going to say to the next occupant, you cannot conclude that this is the last person who will disregard all of the protocols and rules. you cannot assume this. you can only assume that we have this one and you can hope that there will be -- will not be another. but there can be and if we show that there are no guardrails, if we demonstrate that we don't have the courage to do what
article 2, section 4 of the constitution mandates, in my opinion, our inaction today will result in future actions that will be harmful to this nation. this is our calling. only we can bring justice to all of these that i have called to your attention tonight that are being discriminated against. and we can't bring the kind of justice that is needed by ignoring the harmful discrimination that is taking place. more than 50% of the americans of a poll a couple of months ago indicated that more than 50% of the people in this country believe that this president is a racist. which ignore it, because it is uncomfortable. it's easier for us to take on the challenge of national security. well, invidious discrimination
that causes white supremacist to march up and down the street and allows they can murder people of a certain how, from a certain place, that's harmful to this country. this level of invidious discrimination should not be tolerated by this nation. we have a responsibility to stand up for those who are not in this chamber to stand up for themselves. this is our calling. i am here tonight on behalf of all of these that i have called to your attention. i stand for them. i may stand alone, but better to stand alone than not stand at all. i stand for them because i know the harm that they can and have
suffered. and i believe that we ought to have at least one article of impeachment that deals with invidious discrimination. i believe it. i encourage it. i support it. i understand that we want to get back to bigotry as usual and i understand that through a limited extent, i stand in the way of getting back to bigotry as usual. back to bigotry as usual when it's a talking point, not an action item. so you don't have to vote on articles of impeachment that will deal with bigotry. that's too hard. i understand that we want to get back tore bigotry as usual where we can say principles above politics and we can proclaim
that we put party -- which do not put party above country. i understand. i want to get back to bigotry as usual. and i am sorry that i am one of the imped meants. but i can't let it go. i know what the suffering is like. and i suppose it's my destiny to be here to call these things to our attention. and we can ignore them. we can tolerate this bigotry. but remember this, those who tolerate bigotry, perpetrate it. there are people and organizations who have built their reputation fighting bigotry. yet, when there was an
opportunity to vote to deal with bigotry in the highest office of the land, well, the argument was the senate won't convict, so why do we do it? well, the same argument for discrimination as it relates to national security, as it relates to abuse of power. same argument, but we now put principles above politics. same argument. there are those who said that, well, you know what will happen if you remove the current occupant. well, same argument could be made now. but, it's because we have a different issue if not invidious discrimination. we now can put principle above politics. we now are not concerned with
who the next occupant might be. we now say that the senate has to do its job and we have to do our job. things have changed and thank god they have. i'm appreciative that they have changed. i really am. i'm calling to our attention the necessity to have an article of impeachment related to invidious discrimination. there are those who believe that in this country invidious discrimination has become a ol, a tool to be used by a political party, a tool to be used to rally the votes to get out the votes to create a quins to vote. just the tools to be used. and that tool is being managed so that the political parties can continue to play their games.
a tool. i don't want to manage. i want to end. i don't want us to manage invidious discrimination. i want us to see us end it. that's why i stand here like a network tied to a single garment of destiny and impacts all indirectly and dr. king's most famous were, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. injustice in any community in this country is a threat to justice in every community in this country. i love my country. i didn't come to congress to make this speech. i love my country. i didn't come to congress to impeach a president. but because i love my country,
i'm making this speech. and because i love my country, i have brought articles of impeachment. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. members are reminded to refrain in engaging in personalities towards the president. under the speaker's announced the of january 3, 2019, chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. shike earth for 30 minutes. mr. schweikert: in listening to my friend, mr. green, we're friends. i think we always voted against each other on everything but we were always civil to each other and that's hard to communicate with a lot of our brothers and sisters and folks at home, that you canville contentious issues
that we absolutely agree on. and we have a family motto, and i don't know if it works, conservative but don't jerk about it. but we try very hard and see if we can do something that is interesting, because our other saying is it's about the math and the math always wins. the reason we start these presentation with this board up is if you actually look at our future instead of the chaos that this place seems to be bathing in this year and care about what is happening to the country and my little four-year-old daughter, best little girl ever, what is her future going to be like? when you look at the c.b.o. data, there are important data
points that are not republicans or democrats, they are math. next five years, just the growth of social security, medicare and health care entitlements, just the growth, equals the defense department spending. two full defense departments is just the spending growth. e expect 91% of the spending growth for your federal government will be social security, health care and medicare entitlement. we have $23 trillion in the bank. you roll it back in, we are $83 trillion in debt and that's not inflation adjusted, the point i'm making is could this body ever engage in this environment on the real headwind that is up against our society
and against all of us because we have a moral obligation to keep our commitments on those earned entitlements, but how do you build an economy to keep our promises? and that's why we put this slide up. we try to make an argument that if you do certain economic policy, tax policies, trade policies, immigration policy, regulatory policies, the adoption of fairly aggressive technology and incentive for labor force participation, incentives for someone older who if they choose to to stay in the labor force, there is all sorts of things to do here, even down to actually being honest about the demographics of the country,
the fact that our birth rates have in many ways collapsed and you have population stability, it's complex and seems to offend everyone where we have a complex problem. let's talk about the good news. the proof that tax policy particularly can have pretty substantial effects on the society. so last friday, the treasury posted up its numbers and you don't call them receive news, you call them receipts. i was corrected on my first day on ways and means committee. post-tax reform. do you remember the apocalypse that was coming? we were told about it going to happen with the tax reform.
highest revenues in u.s. history. we had a 4% growth in true receive news, true receipts. inflation adjusted, second highest in u.s. history. we had an interesting year in 2015 and a number of ano, ma'am lies and high spike in revenues. second highest inflation adjusted in u.s. history. 4% growth in receipts. problem is we had about a 7-plus in spending and do it year after year after year. to be honest in that growth in spending. i believe over half of it was on auto pilot. the population growth of our baby boomers started to move into our benefit years. and back to my first comments,
it's happening. it is just demographic. the other part where one side wanted to fix under investment in the military. you had to do certain types of flifmente spending and look at the growth of the economy physically in 2018, every social program, whether social security disability and there were some food stamps, they're all down, which should be joyous. but once again, the chart i'm showing here, i don't know where more aren't talking about this, because just a couple of years ago, we were told this couldn't happen. we had lots of experts come and testify, lots of folks writing articles, lots of testimony and debate here on the floor.
those of us who took a beating over our math, which turned out to be right, do we ever get an apology or another occasion lunacy is allowed to engage in the rage machine and ceilings the math, are more valuable than the truth. it breaks my heart. how do you do good things for society if you aren't allowed to have an honest conversation about the math? so again, let's go back to the basics. do you see the red? the first pie chart is 1960. and you see it was about 34% of our spending is what you would call being on auto pilot. today it's -- what do we have on this chart? it's actually now over 70%.
of our spending is functionally form lake. so we come to the floor -- formulaic. so we come to the floor and vote on bills but we don't vote on that red. because those are benefits you get when you turn a certain age. when you fall under a certain income. things that are automated. but yet, look what's happening. take a look. and if you remove defense, think about that, so you remove the 15% that's defense, and you start to realize, making sure that the chart -- we're using the updated chart. so mandatory spending, the 15% of the budget that's defense, there's only another 15% that's all the rest of government. health research, the f.b.i., the c.i.a., you know, everything else. the agencies. the forest service. it's actually only about 15% of our spending. your government is functionally
an insurance company with an army. i know that sounds a little right to, but it's sort of a little bit funny -- trite, but it's sort of a little bit funny and actually quite true. so how do you deal with the reality? the reality of it is back to that very first board. there is a path. it will require democrats and republicans to actually understand a calculator, understand the benefits of growth and growth being moral, but growth also doing stunningly good things for americans. and also that growth gives us a fighting chance not to break the 95% debt to g.d.p. ratio that we're heading towards very, very soon. this erstanding where debt is coming from, why this is portant, is all day long
members of congress come behind these microphones and we talk about all the things we want to do. but what happens when you can't do the things because the current promises are consuming everything? so remember our earlier comment, if you remove social security, remove medicare and look at the 30-year window, you have about $23 trillion in the bank. you move social security and medicare back in and you start where we're at. the goal here is to keep our promises, produce enough economic expansion and engage in health of tech noling care disruptions to make the math work. is that republican or democrat? it's neither. it's actually what's really good for our society. but it's the reality. so let's actually touch on just a couple of these things. and i'm sorry this is the best slide i have on this subject area. it's a little noisy.
but there's a democrat member who, he and i have been working on this, trying to actually promote continued investment in things like diabetes. turns out if you can follow this noisy chart, we're modeling that the projected costs of medicare, about 30% of it is diabetes. what would happen if we could actually have either a technology breakthrough on everything helping our brothers and sisters with obesity issues, to being able to grow pancreatic cells and reactvate someone's pancreatic reas so it's producing insulin? those investments are worthwhile because they have such a dramatic multiplier effect. we're actually right now in our office trying to do the research of alzheimer's. what would happen if we had a successful treatment for even some of the categories of dementia? or even the postponement of alzheimer's? and what it actually means.
so these are occasions where we're trying to build a formula saying, ok, we already know tax policy is working in expanding the economy. we're going to talk about all the good things happening there. we already know that if these trade deals come, like usmca. our model says it's a half a point of g.d.p. growth. you would think this body would just be giddy to get that passed because growth is moral. it also really helps on us having the resources to keep our promises. how about many of the other things we work on, where if you're going to build an immigration system, do you design an immigration system that maximizes immigration expansion for our society? that's why there's so many modelers now, economic modelers, who are talking about moving like the rest of the world is, to talent-based immigration systems, beauty of it is obviously you don't care about
someone's, you know, religion or color or who they cuddle with or all these other things, you care about the talents they bring to our society and help us grow because we have trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars of promises we need -- promises, we need the economic expansion to keep our promises. you see, it's a broken record that needs to play over and over because we live in a world of distractions and almost rage around here right now. and yet these are the types of issues that are critical. these are the types of issues we should all run on. so that's an example there. so let's actually talk about a little bit of creativity. last week we had something called h.r. 3 in the ways and means committee. and it's referred to, some people will refer to it as reference pricing. take a handful of european countries, find their statistical mean, give it a variance of 130% or, excuse me,
from over here, you know, 100% to 130%, and you have to price within there and if you price outside that range, you get a 95% tax if you're the pharmaceutical manufacturer or seller. ok. except within just a couple moments a number of smart people in the room were laying out saying, ok, you can scam it this way. you can do a rebate over here. you can backdoor -- so raise the price on these pharmaceuticals, lower the price on these so the country of france, when they're buying, their mean cost is the same. and there was no willingness in the room by the majority democrats to have a conversation of, this doesn't actually accomplish what you want. and
and modeled to us that there will be a substantial falloff in new drugs that are the disruption that we're trying to get. you remember how the previous slide, we were just talking about the miracle, if you had a cure for diabetes, what would happen if you had alzheimer's? what about some of the ones we know we have here already? the single-shot cure that cures heemphilia, one of the most expensive for an individual medical conditions in our society. it can be up to around $600,000 a year. single-shot cure, it's here. we should actually have been having a discussion of how you finance it so every one of the 8,600, that's the best number i have right now, of our brothers and sisters who have heemphilia, we can cure them not only years but over months. and it turns out for our brothers and sisters who are in the chronic population, 5% of the population, is the majority of our health care spending. so what about the concept of a disruption, like we were talking, health care disruptions ere you start curing
individuals who have these chronic conditions? and they're no longer part of the chronic population that is the majority of our health care spending. instead of having the absurd debate we've had in this body for 10 years, the democrat version, the a.c.a., on who should get subsidized and who should have to pay, and then of course the republican alternative which was not on who gets sub diesed and who -- subsidized and who gets paid, but who has to pay and who gets subsidized. we've been debating the financing of health care, not the disruption of things we can do technology-wise, incentive-wise, to crash the price. because you've already seen the charts. medicare's, what, 3/4 of the unfunded liabilities. i just showed you that almost 30% of it is just diabetes coverage. how do you get this body to focus on the reality of the math
and move towards solutions that actually solve these problems? and so if you're going to try to be creative around here, what you find out is by the time you make your first sentence of, here's an idea, you already have folks on the other side shutting it down saying, oh, that doesn't -- i'm not comfortable with that. can i just point -- i'm just going to put up another board, just as a imple -- a simple thought experiment. thought experiment. so work with me here. 50% of the pharmaceuticals that will be picked up at pharmacies today, 50%, the experts tell us will not be used or will not be used properly. one more time. half the pharmaceuticals that will be picked up today will not be used or will not be used properly. ok. think of that. if we could actually have some impact on that, you want to do something on drug prices, that's one -- do we argue about that? we don't argue on that fact.
it just doesn't fit into the narrative. so we have the technology today where we know when the pill bottle's opened. we actually have the machines that actually, if your mom, your grandma needs this pill at 8:00 a.m. and this pill at 12:00 noon and this one -- there's a little machine that does not only the dispensing, but will talk to her and actually also do a cell phone notification and if the little cup holding the pill isn't moved, it will send you a text message as a family member. think about that. that's a technology that has almost nothing to do with actually being part of pharma. but actually would help us on that portion of that 50% that's not being used properly. how about the other -- the portion of that 50% that just aren't used at all? we've been trying to do the math saying, how about for high-value
pharmaceuticals, put them in sterile packaging. put them in single-use packaging and let them be returnable. for the high value ones. because on one hand, we will get testimony of folks who are outraged that these small molecule pharmaceuticals are ending up in the water supply and other places being flushed down the toilets. we just this weekend had takeback in so many of our communities. but the fact of the matter is, how many pharmaceuticals that are perfectly good, that if they've been packing aned properly, could have been returned -- packaged properly, could have been returned? as a body we support recycling for everything else, but i had a democrat member come up to me and say, i'm just not comfortable with that. how about if it had a genuine, substantial price impact? how about if it became a way to help our brothers and sisters who don't have access to some of these pharmaceuticals, a
price-efficient way to get them? how about if it was just good for the environment? turns out the technology exists. there's a number of organizations out there that are already experimenting with cart rajs that -- rather the ridges that stay absolutely sterile, that those that are unused are returnable. a type of multilayer blister pack that stays absolutely sterile, that makes them returnable. liquid type of pharmaceuticals that are in single-shot doses. meaning the other ones are returnable. it's just -- it's a thought experiment much -- experiment. but because it didn't fit the narrative of let's beat the crap out of the pharmaceutical companies, and, look, i'm not saying they're saints, but it didn't fit the narrative to have something that was creative, it was like talking to a blank wall. that's a problem around here. i'm willing to listen. can i get my brothers and
sisters who claim we want to do good things for society, we want to lower pharmaceutical prices, we're going to put every creative idea on the table, except for the ones that aren't theirs? it doesn't work that way. so last bytyqi -- bit. in the previous couple of weeks, we've come to the floor here, and we chose not to bring all the boards, but -- and the something i personally struggle with. if i had come to the this -- come to this body a couple of years ago a -- ago and said, and i hate this term, but the proper term, you know, our brothers and sisters where they didn't finish high school, or a single individual without college education, we would have meetings in the joint economic committee where they were doing modeling and we were functionally writing them off in society. saying, these populations are going to be part of the sort of -- i don't have a better term,
the permanent underclass. what has happened the last two years? cortiles those lowest are the fastest rising incomes in our society. single women, no partner at home 7.6% growth in income. if i stood behind this microphone and said this is what's going to happen in our society, but it happened. i believe in the last five quarters. we had the fastest growing income in the entire country and not the folks at the top. what happens when you have a country that has more jobs than available worker?
for those with numbers, if i came to this room a couple of years ago and said we are going to blast beyond 63% of labor participation and all the models said we will continue to fall, there are amazing things happening out there. you think there would be a little joy. for a body that claims we care about working men and women, for a body that claims we care about those who had a really rough previous decade, you would think there would be joy in this body and look at the math, look at the fascinating things, ok, we'll get the unemployment numbers this will coming friday, and then look at something that is called the used fixed data and look at these fascinating numbers out there, when you get some of the broad data of how many of our friends and
neighbors who have developmental issues, handicaps, barriers that have been for them to participate in the work force. they are moving into the work force because businesses are so desperate for workers and making accommodations. is that republican or democrat? it is american. when we see the numbers of hispanic, african-americans, women, all of these subgroups we love to break up our math into and they are tied for record highs, why isn't there joy? when you look at what has happened to wages, why isn't there joy? and the reality that that economic expansion that is helping so many of the working men and women in this country
also means your government has had the highest receipt income in u.s. history. blowing the wheels off of all of the predictions, proving that the they were wrong and something's working out there. why isn't this body fixated on doing more of it? instead, congress has now become a place where we do public policy by feeling. instead of calculating. and as my father used to say and terrified i'm quoting my father, he always said the math always win. and with that, i yield back.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. does the gentleman have a motion? mr. schweikert: i would like to make a motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is